[blackshoe]

At a recent club game in the ACBL, an advanced player's B/I partner doubled her RHO's 1♣ opening. Her LHO passed, and the advanced player bid 2♣. Turned out the B/I player had no idea what that meant. The advanced player opined that she used the "standard" meaning, basically "you pick the suit, preferably a major". Or maybe "definitely a major" - I wasn't there and didn't hear the conversation. The bit that interested me, though, was the B/I's next comment: "In what book can I read about cuebids?" Of course, my mind immediately went to Ken Rexford's book, but that's really about control bids, iirc, and almost certainly beyond a B/I's current reach. Then I started thinking about Mike Lawrence's books. There's stuff about cuebids in many of them, but I can't recall a single source that covers the range, by Lawrence or anyone else. Anyone have any suggestions? I did find a quite good discussion of this particular cuebid in Edgar Kaplan's 1963 book on competitive bidding. I don't think the expert opinion on this particular sequence has changed much since then, but I could be wrong.

[babalu1997]

blackshoe, on 2010-October-24, 18:50, said:

At a recent club game in the ACBL, an advanced player's B/I partner doubled her RHO's 1♣ opening. Her LHO passed, and the advanced player bid 2♣. Turned out the B/I player had no idea what that meant. The advanced player opined that she used the "standard" meaning, basically "you pick the suit, preferably a major". Or maybe "definitely a major" - I wasn't there and didn't hear the conversation. The bit that interested me, though, was the B/I's next comment: "In what book can I read about cuebids?" Of course, my mind immediately went to Ken Rexford's book, but that's really about control bids, iirc, and almost certainly beyond a B/I's current reach. Then I started thinking about Mike Lawrence's books. There's stuff about cuebids in many of them, but I can't recall a single source that covers the range, by Lawrence or anyone else. Anyone have any suggestions? I did find a quite good discussion of this particular cuebid in Edgar Kaplan's 1963 book on competitive bidding. I don't think the expert opinion on this particular sequence has changed much since then, but I could be wrong.

I think in this case what she really needs is material concerning responses to a takeout double.

i found this stuff on the net but does not cover the situation on the takeout double:

cuebids


here there is some material about responses to takeout doubles and overcalls which include the cuebid

todouble

[bucky]

Try Mike Lawrence's Complete Book on Takeout Doubles. The scenario (advancer cuebids in response to partner's takeout double) is covered in details. Apparently there are good materials in other chapters of the book as well. I think if everyone reads that book, then 90% of bad takeout doubles today will be remedied.

[bucky]

blackshoe, on 2010-October-24, 18:50, said:

I don't think the expert opinion on this particular sequence has changed much since then, but I could be wrong.

Talking about the expert opinion, what is the consensus here? What does the cuebid show, and how high does it force to?

[han]

Definitely an area where there exist many expert styles. In the US I think forcing until suit agreement is standard.

[masse24]

Mike Lawrence gave a lesson on Takeout Doubles on BBO yesterday.
During the lesson, this exact bidding sequence, coincidentally, was bid on one of the boards.
1♣ (x) P (2♣) P...etc.

According to Mike: "This cue bid usually shows both majors and at least invitational points."

Following is a link to a summary of the lesson (see page 5 for this hand): Takeout Doubles-Mike Lawrence